Publication activity
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
Research across participating journals · All insights follow your collection filters.
Publication activity alongside incoming citations.
Articles grouped by publication year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2026 is year to date. 0 undated publications excluded.
OpenAlex · year of the citing work
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Leading affiliations and themes in this collection.
Full distributions & methodology ↓Independent sources. Clear time scales.
Crossref and OpenAlex · separate totals for the same publication cohorts
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
Latest lifetime totals, grouped by the cited article’s year. These are not citations received in that year.
OpenAlex · incoming citation links grouped by citing-work year
Hover over a year or focus the chart and use arrow keys to inspect values.
2017–2026 annual-history window. 2026 is year to date. Unknown years have gaps.
Select journals to compare the same collection filters. Source totals stay separate. These measures describe research activity, not journal quality.
Articles by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
Latest lifetime totals · grouped by publication year
By year of the citing work · 2017–2026
2026 is year to date. Crossref and OpenAlex lifetime charts share a citation scale. Unknown observations appear as gaps; known zero stays zero. Annual receipts use available OpenAlex histories and may not sum to lifetime totals. 0 undated publications excluded from publication-year charts.
Crossref citation coverage: 4 / 4 publications (100.0%). Latest observation: 21 Oct 2026, 07:22 UTC. Means and percentages use records with known counts.
DOI-matched OpenAlex observations for the same selected publications. These counts are separate from Crossref and are never added together.
Observation range: 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC — 22 Oct 2026 01:36 UTC. Missing matches are not zero citations. Previous observations may remain if a refresh fails or a DOI no longer matches.
OpenAlex affiliations and primary-topic classification. Each publication counts once per institution or country; multi-affiliated publications appear in multiple groups, so percentages can sum above 100%. Countries describe author affiliations, not nationality. Topics use one primary topic per publication.
4 / 4 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 4 selected publications.
4 / 4 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 4 selected publications.
4 / 4 with data · 0 missing or unmatched. Percentages use all 4 selected publications.
Citations are the latest recorded totals for articles published in each year, not citations received during that year. Crossref and OpenAlex remain separate and share the same citation scale. 2026 is incomplete; newer articles have had less time to receive citations.
0 undated publications excluded. Unknown citation counts are shown as —, never as zero. Partial coverage can understate totals; expand each table for known / total records.
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Publications | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 2 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | Crossref citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | All selected publications | 1 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| Publication year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex citations | Publications | Crossref known | OpenAlex known |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | All selected publications | 1 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 0 | 2 | 2/2 | 2/2 |
Incoming citations to the selected publications, grouped by the year of the citing work. This is separate from lifetime citation totals grouped by the cited article’s publication year.
The publication filters above define which articles receive the citations. The citation-year range below only controls this chart and the incoming-citation comparison. Removing publication-year filters includes older articles’ incoming citations too.
Annual history available for 4 / 4 selected publications. Supported display window: 2017–2026; 2026 is incomplete. Within a successfully fetched ten-year window, omitted years mean zero. Missing histories and years beyond a saved observation’s window remain unknown (—); partial coverage can understate totals.
Annual-history observations (UTC): 2026-10-21T07:23:03.224949+00:00 — 2026-10-22T01:36:39.489363+00:00. Older observations may be retained after failed or incomplete refreshes.
| Citation year | Journal / scope | OpenAlex · Citations received by year | Publications | Annual history known |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2018 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2019 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2020 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2021 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2022 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2023 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2024 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2025 | All selected publications | 0 | 4 | 4/4 |
| 2026 | All selected publications | 1 | 4 | 4/4 |
Counts represent citation links, not unique citing papers across a journal: one paper citing two selected articles contributes two links. Older citations outside this window are excluded, so annual sums need not equal lifetime totals. OpenAlex methodology ↗
Publications by publication year. 2026 is an incomplete year.
| Period | Publications |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 2 |
| 2026 | 2 |
Latest Crossref totals for the selected publications; not citations received in the selected years.
Unknown counts are excluded from the mean, median and cited-publication rate.
Same filters, source and counting rules across journals. Descriptive statistics, not a quality ranking.
| Journal / publisher | Publications | Crossref citations | OpenAlex citations | OpenAlex coverage | Crossref mean | Crossref median | Crossref cited %* | Crossref coverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| International Journal of Business Ecosystem & Strategy Bussecon International Academy | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1/1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0.0 | 1/1 · 100.0% |
| International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science SSBFNET | 3 | 1 | 1 | 3/3 | 0.33 | 0 | 33.3 | 3/3 · 100.0% |
* Percentage among publications with a known citation count.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) integration has become increasingly prevalent in various industries, transforming business processes and creating new opportunities. As AI continues to shape the future of work, organisations such as Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) must scrutinize their readiness to develop a workforce competent in AI. AI competencies are fundamental to successfully enacting and integrating these technologies. As a result, several organisations have invested in workforce readiness, albeit these efforts are affected by several actors and determinants. Consequently, organisations must examine the workforce readiness for AI integration as a technology of the future. This paper aims to explore the integration of AI in organisations such as HEIs to ascertain workforce readiness. Addressing three pivotal research questions, it delves into the extent to which the workforce in HEIs is developed and competent in AI, the contributing factors shaping the integration of AI into HEIs’ workforce, and the overall readiness of HEIs in fostering workforce development within the realm of AI. Employing a systematic content analysis review, the study provides pragmatic findings, serving as a reference point to elevate workforce readiness and pinpoint critical determinants. The study identified factors contributing to AI competency development that serve as valuable insights for other institutions aiming to design and implement effective workforce development programs in AI. Also, the findings provide significant implications for institutions seeking to enhance their workforce's competency in AI. Keywords: Artificial Intelligence, Higher Education Institutions, HEIs, Workforce, Readiness.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming higher education, offering both pedagogical advantages and potential academic risks for teaching and learning. This systematic review consolidates existing research to examine whether AI enhances or hinders pedagogical practices in universities. Results show that AI boosts efficiency, supports personalization, and promotes inclusivity through adaptive learning systems, intelligent tutoring platforms, and automated assessment tools. The findings, however, also indicate risks such as academic integrity issues, algorithmic bias, unequal access, and the potential deskilling of educators. Furthermore, policy gaps exacerbate these risks, subjecting institutions to ethical dilemmas and inconsistent practices. The review concludes that responsible integration, supported by strong governance frameworks, drives the impact of AI in academia. Recommendations for policymakers include introducing clear institutional policies for the use of AI in higher education, promoting equitable access to digital infrastructure, and mandating transparency and accountability to ensure trust and fairness in high-stakes decision-making. For higher education institutions, establishing comprehensive guidelines for AI use, investing in faculty training, and redesigning assessments can help ensure inclusivity, preserving creativity, and emphasizing originality and problem-solving skills less easily replicated by AI.
Emerging Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies are transforming the global education sector, with Artificial Intelligence playing a crucial role in enhancing teaching, learning, and administrative processes. In South Africa, AI-driven innovations have the potential to bridge educational gaps, improve student engagement, and personalize learning experiences. Adaptive learning platforms, automated grading systems, and intelligent tutoring applications are revolutionizing education by making it more efficient and accessible. However, despite these advancements, the adoption of AI in South African education faces significant challenges. Key challenges include data privacy concerns, ethical considerations, and a shortage of AI-skilled educators. These challenges create an uneven distribution of AI’s benefits, limiting its potential to improve learning outcomes on a national scale. Highlighting the need to explore the opportunities and barriers associated with the adoption of emerging AI technologies in South African education. Therefore, this study adopts a comprehensive literature review aiming to explore emerging AI technologies in the educational context in south Africa. To achieve this, the research will address the following questions: What impact have new technologies had on South Africa’s development? and in what ways can emerging technologies supporting South Africa's development initiatives. The findings indicate that AI tools have shown success in improving learning outcomes, increasing student engagement, and streamlining administrative tasks in well-resourced schools. However, their impact is uneven due to infrastructural and systemic challenges; also, the widespread adoption is hindered by a persistent digital divide, limited internet access, and a shortage of AI-trained educators, especially in rural areas. Additionally, ethical concerns such as data privacy, algorithmic bias, and the absence of clear regulatory frameworks pose significant barriers.
Sophisticated AI applications like ChatGPT and Grammarly offer distinct advantages for enhancing writing proficiency. They assist users in conceptualising ideas, organising material, and refining writing style, whereas Grammarly focuses on improving grammar, punctuation, and clarity with context-aware recommendations. This is particularly relevant for students who are non-native English speakers, as it supports them and helps bridge educational disparities. While these instruments markedly enhance scholarly writing abilities, their efficacy in tertiary education remains a subject of debate. Recent occurrences of academic dishonesty associated with the improper use of generative AI technologies have negatively impacted higher education. This study assesses the impact of artificial intelligence on enhancing academic writing abilities in students who are not native English speakers. In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria, this study consolidates evidence from scholarly literature, policy reports, and institutional case analyses. Keywords, synonyms, and subject headings were employed to query three electronic databases from 2021 to 2025. The electronic repositories included Scopus, Emerald Insight, Google Scholar, and ProQuest. The evaluation of the publications was conducted through titles and abstracts, followed by an assessment of the full-text papers against the qualifying criteria. The results were derived and amalgamated into a narrative synthesis from selected publications. The results underscored AI's ability to customise and improve the educational experience for learners.
Sophisticated AI applications like ChatGPT and Grammarly offer distinct advantages for enhancing writing proficiency. They assist users in conceptualising ideas, organising material, and refining writing style, whereas Grammarly focuses on improving grammar, punctuation, and clarity with context-aware recommendations. This is particularly relevant for students who are non-native English speakers, as it supports them and helps bridge educational disparities. While these instruments markedly enhance scholarly writing abilities, their efficacy in tertiary education remains a subject of debate. Recent occurrences of academic dishonesty associated with the improper use of generative AI technologies have negatively impacted higher education. This study assesses the impact of artificial intelligence on enhancing academic writing abilities in students who are not native English speakers. In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria, this study consolidates evidence from scholarly literature, policy reports, and institutional case analyses. Keywords, synonyms, and subject headings were employed to query three electronic databases from 2021 to 2025. The electronic repositories included Scopus, Emerald Insight, Google Scholar, and ProQuest. The evaluation of the publications was conducted through titles and abstracts, followed by an assessment of the full-text papers against the qualifying criteria. The results were derived and amalgamated into a narrative synthesis from selected publications. The results underscored AI's ability to customise and improve the educational experience for learners.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming higher education, offering both pedagogical advantages and potential academic risks for teaching and learning. This systematic review consolidates existing research to examine whether AI enhances or hinders pedagogical practices in universities. Results show that AI boosts efficiency, supports personalization, and promotes inclusivity through adaptive learning systems, intelligent tutoring platforms, and automated assessment tools. The findings, however, also indicate risks such as academic integrity issues, algorithmic bias, unequal access, and the potential deskilling of educators. Furthermore, policy gaps exacerbate these risks, subjecting institutions to ethical dilemmas and inconsistent practices. The review concludes that responsible integration, supported by strong governance frameworks, drives the impact of AI in academia. Recommendations for policymakers include introducing clear institutional policies for the use of AI in higher education, promoting equitable access to digital infrastructure, and mandating transparency and accountability to ensure trust and fairness in high-stakes decision-making. For higher education institutions, establishing comprehensive guidelines for AI use, investing in faculty training, and redesigning assessments can help ensure inclusivity, preserving creativity, and emphasizing originality and problem-solving skills less easily replicated by AI.
Emerging Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies are transforming the global education sector, with Artificial Intelligence playing a crucial role in enhancing teaching, learning, and administrative processes. In South Africa, AI-driven innovations have the potential to bridge educational gaps, improve student engagement, and personalize learning experiences. Adaptive learning platforms, automated grading systems, and intelligent tutoring applications are revolutionizing education by making it more efficient and accessible. However, despite these advancements, the adoption of AI in South African education faces significant challenges. Key challenges include data privacy concerns, ethical considerations, and a shortage of AI-skilled educators. These challenges create an uneven distribution of AI’s benefits, limiting its potential to improve learning outcomes on a national scale. Highlighting the need to explore the opportunities and barriers associated with the adoption of emerging AI technologies in South African education. Therefore, this study adopts a comprehensive literature review aiming to explore emerging AI technologies in the educational context in south Africa. To achieve this, the research will address the following questions: What impact have new technologies had on South Africa’s development? and in what ways can emerging technologies supporting South Africa's development initiatives. The findings indicate that AI tools have shown success in improving learning outcomes, increasing student engagement, and streamlining administrative tasks in well-resourced schools. However, their impact is uneven due to infrastructural and systemic challenges; also, the widespread adoption is hindered by a persistent digital divide, limited internet access, and a shortage of AI-trained educators, especially in rural areas. Additionally, ethical concerns such as data privacy, algorithmic bias, and the absence of clear regulatory frameworks pose significant barriers.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) integration has become increasingly prevalent in various industries, transforming business processes and creating new opportunities. As AI continues to shape the future of work, organisations such as Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) must scrutinize their readiness to develop a workforce competent in AI. AI competencies are fundamental to successfully enacting and integrating these technologies. As a result, several organisations have invested in workforce readiness, albeit these efforts are affected by several actors and determinants. Consequently, organisations must examine the workforce readiness for AI integration as a technology of the future. This paper aims to explore the integration of AI in organisations such as HEIs to ascertain workforce readiness. Addressing three pivotal research questions, it delves into the extent to which the workforce in HEIs is developed and competent in AI, the contributing factors shaping the integration of AI into HEIs’ workforce, and the overall readiness of HEIs in fostering workforce development within the realm of AI. Employing a systematic content analysis review, the study provides pragmatic findings, serving as a reference point to elevate workforce readiness and pinpoint critical determinants. The study identified factors contributing to AI competency development that serve as valuable insights for other institutions aiming to design and implement effective workforce development programs in AI. Also, the findings provide significant implications for institutions seeking to enhance their workforce's competency in AI. Keywords: Artificial Intelligence, Higher Education Institutions, HEIs, Workforce, Readiness.
Source coverage refers to this result set; a publication may occur in several sources. Sync times refer to contributing journals.
Missing abstracts: 0 · Missing authors: 0 · Missing publication dates: 0 · Dates without day precision: 0
| Source | Most recent successful journal sync | Latest attempt |
|---|---|---|
| crossref | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |
| ojs-rest | 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 06:46 UTC |
| oai-pmh | 20 Oct 2026 19:55 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 20 Oct 2026 19:50 UTC |
| openalex-enrichment | 21 Oct 2026 07:23 UTC · ijrbs | complete · ijrbs · 21 Oct 2026 07:22 UTC |